Palas

MEMORANDUM ***

Ronald L. Palas appeals the district court’s decision upholding the Commissioner’s denial of his application for disability benefits. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we need not recount it here.

This court reviews the district court’s decision de novo. Edlund v. Massanari, 253 F.3d 1152, 1156 (9th Cir.2001). The decision of the administrative law judge (the “ALJ”), which is the Commissioner’s final decision in this case, will be affirmed if it is supported by substantial evidence in *935 the record and the ALJ applied the correct legal standards. Batson v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 359 F.3d 1190, 1193 (9th Cir. 2004). “Substantial evidence means more than a scintilla but less than a preponderance.” Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1279 (9th Cir.1996) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). “Where evidence is susceptible to more than one rational interpretation, it is the ALJ’s conclusion that must be upheld.” Burch v. Barnhart, 400 F.3d 676, 679 (9th Cir.2005). “The ALJ is responsible for determining credibility, resolving conflicts in medical testimony, and resolving ambiguities.” Edlund,…